I hate Germany too

How galling it must be for the economically in touch to realise that their economy has been outperformed since WWII by a bunch of leftist countries with strong unions like Sweden, Finland and Denmark plus the Netherlands. Of course, if you include health and social factors the US (and other Anglo countries - the UK, Ireland) is even further behind.


Link.

Can we go back to slagging off Germany now?

You, miwild and taxidriver seem to come as a threesome, sort of like Larry, Moe and Curly...

Can you define "outperform"?! Can you provide evidence that trade unions (?!) have played a leading role in what you are claiming? Are you not aware of the many problems which the Nordic countries and the "social model" you allude to are now facing, which Guardian reader types are deliberately oblivious to?
Are you aware of the Alitalia buyout deal which trade unions helped to scuttle just a couple of weeks ago in Italy? Instead of accepting an Air France-KLM takeover package which would have meant cutting somewhere in the region of 1,000 to 2,000 jobs, but which would have saved a company which is bankrupt and which no one wants to touch with a ten foot pole, they refused to back down, Air France and KLM pulled out, and now in all likelihood the company will go under this year meaning losses of over 7,000 jobs!

EDIT: Oh I see. You're not talking about trade unions per se, you're just on one of your statist ideological rants. I guess it makes a change from your usual musings supporting terrorist organizations in the Middle East... Do some research on the real situation in Scandinavia - it's not all roses up there.

What's your benchmark? Of course, given that 1945 was the end of the most destructive war that the world had ever seen, it is the starting point most favorable to your argument. Then there is also the fact that the populations of the aforementioned small countries are around 5 million (Denmark and Finland) 9 million (Sweden) and 16 million (The Netherlands) which makes any comparison to the demographically variant US (303 million) an apples-to-oranges comparison as these societies are very different from that of the US.

Of note from the link posted by Wheel:


As for budgets, all of these countries don't have anything approaching the US expenditures on defense, i.e., they have been free-riders since 1945.

The real reason why Sachs sings their praises is that these nations conform with his Vorbild of "sustainable development" and large amounts of foreign aid for developing countries. Funny how he didn't use per capita GDP .

The low tax rates on capital in Scandinavia are a very important factor- these are too high in the US. I didn't see any mention of outperformance since 1945 in the Sachs article, nor anything about unions having a role in any outperformance. I also doubt that illegal immigration is as much of a factor, especially in the Nordic countries, as it is on the social indicators of the US.

If you want definitions, read the article I linked to. Italy isn't a Nordic country, BTW.

@Wheel: The US has a higher per capita GDP than the countries you mentioned, which is the most obvious indicator of economic success around. Unemployment there is in the same region as the countries you mention and certainly far lower than in Germany. Facts hurt.

And your chanpioning of laissez-faire economics is totally non-ideological, of course.





Much better than the Anglo-Saxon countries though.

Norway, Denmark and Sweden all currently have higher GDP than the US, and the Netherlands are next below.

The point is that these countries are hardly hamstrung by their statist models: far from it. To listen to the third-rate monetarists on this board they should be selling their grannies to survive about now. Since they plainly aren't doing so, the laissez-faire models constantly paraded as paragons of economic sense are obviously not the whole story.


I didn't hold up Germany as an example of a country out-performing the Anglo countries and not did the article I linked to. Try again.

@Wheel: [citation needed]
(for the per capita GDP claim, that is)

I am not ideologically opposed to social democratic doctrine, as you and your ilk are ideologically opposed to the American economic model. There are certain elements which I am opposed to, especially fiscally, and I have major issues with trade unions and what I feel is their irresponsible behavior and unwarranted political clout in most Western European countries in recent history.


Better in what? You are comparing systems which are completely different and which both have, when run efficiently, strengths and weaknesses.


They have also traditionally benefited from hard working labor forces. Things are changing there and what they are finding is that there are more and more people who are taking unfair advantage of the welfare state, and fewer and fewer people who really want to work.

@adrian_t
IMF 2007 figures.

@Wheel: You may want to try quoting the PPP adjusted figures in future. You know, the meaningful ones.
The IMF

Only if you use nominal GDP, which will give you false readings, unless you believe a good or service in Scandinavia really is worth twice what it is in the US. GDP per capita PPP (preferred by economists) tells a different story:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_count...P%29_per_capita


You ignore that these are very different societies than the US (and even the UK). Cultural preferences play a part, and you fail ato acknowledge the benefits of low taxation of capital in the Nordic countries- something more at home with laissez-faire economics. With the notable exception of low levels of capital taxation, what works in the Nordic countries would not work in the US, specifically high levels social welfare payments- we tried that already and it did not work. The Netherlands' unemployment rate is low in large part because it is so easy to get on disability there.

The Soviet threat was a mirage: the US spent all that cash to project its influence around the world by attacking small countries once a decade or so to remind everyone who's boss. Musharraf: 'Armitage said if you don't help we'll bomb your country back to the stone age.'

What the fuck has all this to do with the thréad?

@Conq
I did a PPP query on the IMF data and the Nordic countries are still very near the top, Norway above the US. My point stands: laissez-faire economics is broken as an economic model.

@Mik
Got tired of the sub-Adam Smith bullshit being pushed by the usual suspects. Sorry. Small hijack, nobody got hurt.

Not to change the subject, but to diverge a small bit. I take it you are familiar with the USA. Well after visiting for the Easter break, to South Florida, I was very happy to get back here, even if it was SNOWING!! The Homeless, the lack of Health care, the politics and paranoia, makes Deutschland seem like paradise to me. Sorry to interrupt guys, your chat was so interesting, please go on and Schlaf gut,

Wheel, your point doesn't stand: the US is (far) ahead of the countries you mentioned in PPP GDP per capita. Norway is a special case due to the impact of oil on their small total GDP.

And to claim that the US economy, which is not an example of laissez-faire capitalism anyway, is broken is just completely blind. It is a rich country and an economic powerhouse. I think you do not know what the word broken means.

Wheel, this indicates you just wanted to make an ideological rant rather than actually discuss an economic issue. Your conclusion, besides being unsupported, is rubbish.


Good points here by adrian. The US is in fact a mixed economy.

Topic closed by admin.